I don't mean to disrespect other Revolvers, but this one is not even close.
I would put it in this order:
1. Ruger Redhawks in .357 magnum. There are no .357 magnum revolvers that are more durable than these. Period. Good luck finding one. As one gun writer put it, ".357 magnum RedHawks are probably too much of a good thing..." These guns should appear in webster's next to the word "overbuilt."
2. SA revolvers (either Freedom arms or Ruger).
3. Ruger GP100
There is nothing else that is even close, in my opinion. People focus too much on revolver frames when they get into these discussions. The solid Ruger frames are more robust than the smith frames with the side plates. I'm sorry, but you are drinking Kool aid if you think differently. Having said this, the 686 frames are solid enough in my opinion.
My reason for placing Ruger revolvers ahead of Smiths and Dan Wessons has more to do with the lockwork of the Ruger DA revolvers. Smith and Dan Wesson revolvers lock in two places: the back of the cylinder and the bottom of the cylinder. The third "locking" position on these revolvers is the ejector rod in the front of the cylinder. That is not a true lock. If you think that the ejector rod is good enough, explain to me why Smiths often end up with bent ejector rods? Also explain why 686s and other Smith revovlers go out of timing faster than Ruger revolvers. I don't mean to bash these guns, because I would own one if I could afford to have a huge gun collection. My resources are limited, so I can't justify getting a "pre-lock" 686 right now.
The Ruger triple locking cylinder has three "real" cylcinder locking positions. The Ruger ejector rod isn't used to lock the cylinder in place. Loading manuals list Ruger-only loads for a reason. The Ruger-only loads are too much for Revolvers from other manufacturers to handle. A good Ruger revolver will handle anything that you can dish out at it.
The Ruger design excells in the areas of durability and reliability. Smiths, Dan Wessons, and Colts excell in other areas. Which revolvers are the best? That depends on what you are looking for. For flexibility, go with a Dan Wesson. For looks and out of the box accuracy, go with a Smith or a Colt. For reliability and durability, go with a Ruger.
If you get a Ruger, just make sure that you inspect the gun before you buy it. Ruger's QC is not what it used to be. Ruger's *designs* are the most robust and reliable ones out there, but you still need to make sure that you don't end up with a lemon. I would recommend that you fondle the gun and inspect it before you buy it. I would not recommend ordering one online.
The only real gripe that I have with Rugers DA revolvers relate to their "finish". The guns sometimes get beat up pretty bad at the factory. Ruger doesn't invest much money in smoothing out the dings. That is usually done by hand and represents a huge component in the cost of producing revolvers. Ruger focuses on making robust guns, not pretty ones. The other little gripe that I have is related to the triggers. The triggers sometimes have burrs in them as well. Cleaning that up is easy, but it is even easier to find one with a smooth out of the box trigger. It took me a few weeks of looking, but I found a "super" GP100 with an excellent trigger. If you go with the Gp100, you should go to the Ruger forum and get your hands on Iowegan's IBOK manual. It is a detailed manual for the GP100. It describes, in detail, how to completely field strip, and clean these guns. It is pretty easy to do, but it is even easier with this handbook.